The problem is that American politics is a team sport. The bigger problem is that team sport mentality is just accepted as the norm.
Politics -- as voting -- should be a dry, boring act. Back when 30% of the electorate was actually engaged, it was. Now, demagogues fill the airwaves with outlandish accusations, turning countrymen against each other.
After all the demagoguery that is constantly being used to rile some people who are genuinely distressed because they've lost their job/house/life, I worry some of these people are genuinely confused; the enemy is no longer Osama -- it's now Obama.
As I recall, they were 'torn to shreds.' Rumor was, they were going to be split up. We were all talking about which company Microsoft would still be after it split up -- would it be the OS creator or would Bill Gates want to hold on to the other lucrative software...
Then prezitend bush took over.
Suddenly the DOJ folded up the case & MS didn't see any real penalties for actually being found guilty of abusing their monopoly.
So it sounds like someone decided to upgrade the hardware storing the data without making a backup.
Any 'good people' involved should have had a plan. The plan should have included some back-out procedure (which implies step 1 is that data replication takes place and is verified). If management didn't want to pay for the the physical requirements of the plan, then I hope that the systems engineers got it in writing (via submission and rejection of a written plan). For something this critical, doing the paperwork not only makes it much easier to respond to problems when they occur, it means there's a nice big paper CYA there when management decides to do things on the cheap.
So I agree, management is just as culpable as the guy(s) who decided to do this without having a proper plan in place.
I still can't get over the fact that so much relied upon one single SAN operating. It's just insane.
This is an issue of irresponsibility. Plain and Simple. The company responsible for maintaining the data should -- at the very least -- have had some full system backup from last month. If they had some old backup somewhere at least you could chalk it up to systems failure or bad backup tape or bad admin or something.
But the fact that there is no backup anywhere indicates brazen negligence on the part of everyone responsible for the data. Everyone who had a part in designing the system and managing the system is culpable. The most ridiculous part of this is the over-reliance on server-side data storage by the sidekick designers.
And I forgot to mention that Unity doesn't provide access to native library calls. So, for instance, there's no way to bring up the iPhone keyboard from within a Unity app. This could very well be changing -- and may have already changed, but last I knew Unity apps on iPhone were severely crippled by this.
But that's just a symptom of the real problem with using Unity as the basis for development -- you're relying on a closed platform from third-party with relatively low vested interest in the platform. If a platform doesn't make fiscal sense for Unity to continue publishing and updating, as a Unity developer you have very little recourse. I'm not pretending that it's any different for Apple and NS libs, but Apple has much more invested in the success of the platform, so it's much more unlikely that they will discontinue support of the platform.
Unity is nice, but the end result is massive bloat. It's a nice way for a developer or company to get into the iPhone market without having to learn Objective C, but I don't think they've 'nailed it.'
I've seen extremely simple applications take 18 - 24 MB space on an iPhone. That's with no textures, no graphics no nothing except basic 3D objects being rendered. An equivalent app developed in Objective C takes 10% - 25% of that.
18 - 24MB doesn't seem like a lot until you think about the fact that all that is all being loaded into the very limited available memory. There's very little room to make something that takes advantage of Unity's framework. And the fact that Unity is trying to do garbage collection in a separate thread means that the performance of the App goes down.
You're right, they're doing some cool stuff -- and the fact that it's cross-platform capable makes it that much better. But personally, I decided to put in the little bit of time it took to learn Objective C and the discipline to retain and release over putting my eggs into Unity's basket (that one was an easy choice).
Perl was so. fricking. awesome. back when the only choices were shell scripts or compiled apps. It was such a leap forward. Who wouldn't be excited about Perl back in the '90s
But we're far beyond the sophistication of Perl. I'm not saying that you can't do some pretty fricking awesome things in Perl, but that Perl doesn't do many of the meta-tasks that we've come to expect in languages. These supporting features don't necessarily make things run or run fast, but rather help developers in the process of creation and maintenance. The industry has grown up and the black magic of hacking has been codified into the craft of coding.
And Perl isn't alone here, C++ is undergoing the same process.
But it's definitely no silver bullet; it's not for every project, nor every developer, I've been disappointed to see how integration of Agile via scrum derail projects and upended a department where inexperienced / low skilled developers got overwhelmed by the shift in focus from doing it 'perfectly' to shipping. There's a subtle but significant shift in responsibility from the project manager to the developer. Lots of guys don't like it and really can't handle having things so visible; they're used to being able to hide behind the complexity of their work for days or even weeks without really having any accountability. Agile gives them nothing to hide behind.
Moving the factory to another location may work; the labor force is (relatively) easy to replace, but I highly doubt that MS could pull it off.
There's a reason that places like San Francisco and Seattle are home to Google and Microsoft. The kind of people who make Google and Microsoft work are attracted to the quality of life offered by the location. Making money is enough for some people, but for many others, what you do for money is just part of the equation.
Maybe Microsoft will try to pull a Boeing and move corporate headquarters to Reno Nevada, but I doubt they could pull off uprooting their labor force and moving them elsewhere.
don't know what's more funny, this comment, or the fact that it was moderated "Insightful."
It's truly surprising how self-destructive these people are... do they really expect that they will gain support for actions like this? Their movement, and their cause will only suffer for stupidity like this.
I know I wasn't very clear about it, but my thinking goes something like this:
1) A political party can use socialistic economic theory in crafting platforms and laws no matter whether they choose to name themselves "Socialist" or not.
2) A political party can name themselves "Socialist" and not represent or embody any of the economic theories of Socialism in praxis.
Therefore political entities are distinct and separate from the economic theory.
Even so, you're right; within the context of this argument I've not given enough focus to the political "Socialist" party and focused exclusively on the economic theory. Even after you made valid assertions and backed up your assertions with evidence, I still didn't give your points the credence they deserved.
In addition, I've acted rudely in how I responded to you.
I apologize. I should have been focusing less on why I disagree, and more on what the fundamental discussion was.
I've become very angry about the level of noise, flippant demonization and overall 'hate' that's been associated with something so good as providing healthcare to everyone that I became overly emotional about this argument. Instead of being a honest broker in a dialog, I shamefully became just another one of the shouting voices.
I believe that there is a fundamental problem with how some people are framing this debate; the use of Hitler and Naziism as scare tactics is vile and low. My fear is that naive and dangerous people are being manipulated by the constantly blowing bellows of hate; thus my example of some conservative comparing their lot to that of a Jew in Nazi Germany. The message is out: Obama is like Hitler, and America is under attack by un-American forces of Socialism. No matter how ridiculous it may seem to me, there are plenty of people who are swallowing this whole. It's difficult; often I feel like I'm trying to tell people that the world is round while they insist it's flat.
I completely agree; politics is not a team sport and it's a shame that some put party first and have a 'can-do-no-wrong' attitude about their 'team.' It's interesting that you feel I am a part of the team-sport mentality. I've always thought myself independent from that; but maybe it's time for a little introspection.
I'd say that putting a 'right' label on the source of the hyperbole is falling into this dichotomy of good-guys and bad-guys; however, it's difficult not to -- since there is no finer granularity available than 'right,' 'far-right,' and the individuals from whom these absurd ideas are espoused -- and there are many.
The thing that saddens me most about all of this team-sport mentality is that people seem to be forgetting that we are all countrymen. We are all in this together. Whether or not we agree on the semantics of the policies, we all have the ultimate goal of prosperity for our children and our countrymen.
A political party with the word Socialist in their name does not equate to Socialism.
Cripe man, do you really think the Republican party mean republic? Does the Democratic party mean democracy? Or maybe you think that North Korea is a Democracy because the official name of the country is "Democratic People's Republic of Korea."
your abject hypocrisy in not proclaiming the left's eight years of positioning themselves as the replacements for the Jews as the victims of a new Nazi-like regime...
Are you saying that by calling Bush's actions Hitler-like, someone is implicitly saying that they are the equivalent of a Jew in Nazi Germany? If so, that's beyond ignorant; I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. Maybe you don't understand the difference between people who dissent and people who are exterminated, but it seems pretty clear to me.
And I've already said:
Such extreme hyperbole is so outrageous, invective, ignorant and so unbelievably callous, I know I'd remember it. I'd be just as outraged to hear anyone [say] it -- no matter who they were.
Maybe you don't understand, so I'll say it again: If I heard anyone in America liken themselves to Jews in Nazi Germany I would be just as outraged.
Again: you think that people who aren't happy about nationalized this-and-that and are comparing Obama to Hitler are usurping the memory of the people Hitler actually victimized.
I'm sorry, friend, but this is absolutely not what I've been saying. If you go back to where this all began, this is what I wrote:
I actually read someone who equated the position of conservatives in America right now to the Jews in Germany while the Nazis came to power.
Adolf Hitler was actually a decent guy when he was elected...
I'm sorry? You mean the Hitler who wrote this long before he was elected:
The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.
or this
Was there any form of filth or profligacy, particularly in cultural life, without at least one Jew involved in it? If you cut even cautiously into such an abscess, you found, like a maggot in a rotting body, often dazzled by the sudden light - a kike!
or this:
The great masses of the people will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.
Hitler was always a repugnant little man thrust into a position he should never have held because of reparations for World War I.
It would be very interesting to hear if you could find an analog to these quotes in any of Obama's books or writings.
Sorry, I just don't care whether you want to justify your actions by the actions of others whom you don't agree with. That's your choice. You want to run on this intellectual hamster-wheel of calling people Hitler -- maybe that's where your mind is. Maybe when anyone brings up anything having to do with Naziism in the current social debate, that's your go-to talking point.
That's fine. But it sure is boring and it isn't relevant.
The further we get down this path, the more evident it is that your only goal to justify the ridiculous use of Naziism and Hitler by the right to demonize Obama. Okay, that's where your head is at, but honestly, I. Just. Don't. Care.
Go ahead, call Obama Hitler. Honestly, it's so ridiculous, it's just funny.
The fact that you still still can't see the difference between conservatives in America likening themselves to Jews in Nazi Germany and using the idea of Hitler to demonize someone else... well, all I can say is that I'm sorry for you.
I was simply reporting what the term means nowadays
Thanks mr. colloquial dictionary. I guess I should start writing "loose" whenever I mean "lose." Because that's what the term means nowadays.
Sorry friend, trying to redefine Socialism because a group of people you hang around with can't understand the difference between systems of government and economic systems doesn't change what the term means. It just means that they, and you, don't understand what it means.
And so my friend, although it's probably going to be fun to have some ad nauseum argument about whether the a group of people misusing a term means that it gets redefined, I have one or two more intellectually stimulating things I'd rather do with my time -- like pull the hair from my nostrils.
Thus and heretofore, mr. colloquial dictionary (right-wing edition), Socialism means... well whatever you think it means -- I guess. And while we're at it, we should redefine Liberalism to mean godless, poo-poo headism that makes people cry... and bad things too. And maybe we should also redefine Conservative to mean flowers and love and all good things.
I guess we're back to ye olde (and boring/unproductive) Hitler name calling. The only one bringing up Hitler in the context of this conversation was you. You've been trying desperately, it seems, to find some parity between what I'm saying and a bunch of people using an stupid rhetorical trick to demonize someone else.
So some people called George Bush Hitler. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but it doesn't really matter in the context of what I wrote. I played nice and answered your question even though it was -- at best -- tangential to the conversation (but more likely -- as seems to be supprted by your latest post -- a clumsy attempt to open an ad hominem attack against me).
The sad part of it all is what is implied by your equating these stupid, hackneyed rhetorical tricks to the absolutely outrageous, callous hyperbole that I wrote about.
It's like you just don't seem to get it. It's as if you can't understand the absolute horror that was perpetrated against those people. It's as if you can't see how awful it is that the memory of those poor souls is being denigrated by sad, angry people who can't possibly fathom the travesty of it; otherwise they wouldn't dare equate the 'travails' of being a conservative in America under a black president to being a Jew in Nazi Germany.
Were you equally appalled when liberals (in far greater numbers than some noisy right wingers, and for years on end, with gushing media support, insisted they were in the same plight as the victims of fascism and persecution a la Europe 60 years ago?
That's interesting. So now you've heard people say that they felt like Jews in Nazi Germany while George Bush was president.
And not only did you hear it before, you heard it for years.
That's interesting. I never heard anything like that before. Such extreme hyperbole is so outrageous, invective, ignorant and so unbelievably callous, I know I'd remember it. I'd be just as outraged to hear anyone hear it -- no matter who they were.
So in a way, you get your answer about me -- although I'm not quite certain why you chose to focus on me personally rather than what I said.
So essentially you've tried to make the disingenuous argument, "Them thar govmint guys is takin' over them thar internets. Socialism!"
Sorry, friend; you can call it Fascism if you want. You can call it Communism, Totalitarianism or whatever diabolical system of government you want to try to demonize it with, but Socialism just doesn't work. It's like comparing country music to Fox News; they're just not the same thing. They may rely on each other, they may have many of the same supporters, but they're not the same thing.
I don't know if you're being willfully ignorant to support your position, or you just can't understand that Socialism does not equate to Communism or any other form of government.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that it's a complex concept confused by decades of propaganda and demonization of Communist states and by association, Socialism. But believe it or not France -- that dastardly Socialist country -- is a Democracy.
It's not about the tired old demonization via Nazi comparisons; it's about trying to put yourself in the place of the persecuted although you are not. It's about trying to synthesize something 'wrong' with America; but other than speaking in platitudes and generalizations about some unknown threat, you can't say what it is.
Conversations become trite and meaningless when the old Nazi accusations start flying. What I'm appalled by, and what I wrote about, is the idea that conservatives would think that the awful 'plight' of conservatives in America is somehow akin to what happened to the Jews. I mean, what kind of gall does that take?
And if you still think this is about name calling, and demonizing Bush or Obama by calling them Hitler, it's not really necessary to reply; I'm not really interested.
Wow, way to get back on talking points! Awesome job pulling that sentence completely out of context and trying to make this some debate about how the country will implode because everyone might have access to healthcare. AAAH! IT'S CRAZY! 'MERIKA IS GOING TO END BECAUSE EVERYONE MIGHT HAVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HEALTH INSURANCE!!!!!!11
So let's usher in some context here and see whether this is really a stealth debate about health insurance. What did that "Enter socialism" guy say? Oh yeah:
Seizing my Internet connection based on vague 'emergency' rationale has me very concerned. Enter socialism...
So mr. colloquial dictionary, what does that have to do with Socialism? I'm interested in how the government taking control of a public medium (much like they would the highways, the telephones and the television) in an emergency has to do with "state control of an industry."
I suppose you could try the not so sleight-of-hand argument and say "them govmint guys want to control this here internet industry." Well, that's not only disingenuous, it completely ignores the definition of Socialism. Socialism is not a political system; it is an economic system.
So you're implying that someone is somehow justified for equating their own position in the current American political landscape to Jews in Nazi Germany because someone somewhere called someone else Hitler.
Nice.
I guess maybe it's a pretty abstract thing thing if you've never seen the death camps. It's difficult for me that people do not understand the fucking horror those people went through? It makes me angry that some feel they can use them for their own political purposes -- purposes that have not one thing to do with Nazis or Jews.
What does this have to do with Socialism? Really? The ignorant hyperbole coming from the right wing is unbelievable. I mean, do any of you even know what Socialism is? Or do you just know that it was a term co opted by the ignorant, vile fools who called themselves the National Socialist (NAZI) Party?
I actually read someone who equated the position of conservatives in America right now to the Jews in Germany while the Nazis came to power. It's un-fucking-believable really. I've been to Auschwitz and seen the sea of empty shoes that belonged to men and women -- to boys and girls who were extinguished. I've seen the well-documented horror of mechanized human extermination. Equating the conservative position within the current political landscape as an analog to the horror of what the Nazis did is not just ignorant, insidious, hateful hyperbole, it degrades the absolute horror of what was done and those it was done to.
Slashdot Mirror
Fine. get 51% of the "owners" to agree to the course of action. Once you've crossed that threshold, then you've got a point.
The problem is that American politics is a team sport. The bigger problem is that team sport mentality is just accepted as the norm.
Politics -- as voting -- should be a dry, boring act. Back when 30% of the electorate was actually engaged, it was. Now, demagogues fill the airwaves with outlandish accusations, turning countrymen against each other.
After all the demagoguery that is constantly being used to rile some people who are genuinely distressed because they've lost their job/house/life, I worry some of these people are genuinely confused; the enemy is no longer Osama -- it's now Obama.
As I recall, they were 'torn to shreds.' Rumor was, they were going to be split up. We were all talking about which company Microsoft would still be after it split up -- would it be the OS creator or would Bill Gates want to hold on to the other lucrative software...
Then prezitend bush took over.
Suddenly the DOJ folded up the case & MS didn't see any real penalties for actually being found guilty of abusing their monopoly.
So it sounds like someone decided to upgrade the hardware storing the data without making a backup.
Any 'good people' involved should have had a plan. The plan should have included some back-out procedure (which implies step 1 is that data replication takes place and is verified). If management didn't want to pay for the the physical requirements of the plan, then I hope that the systems engineers got it in writing (via submission and rejection of a written plan). For something this critical, doing the paperwork not only makes it much easier to respond to problems when they occur, it means there's a nice big paper CYA there when management decides to do things on the cheap.
So I agree, management is just as culpable as the guy(s) who decided to do this without having a proper plan in place.
I still can't get over the fact that so much relied upon one single SAN operating. It's just insane.
This is an issue of irresponsibility. Plain and Simple. The company responsible for maintaining the data should -- at the very least -- have had some full system backup from last month. If they had some old backup somewhere at least you could chalk it up to systems failure or bad backup tape or bad admin or something.
But the fact that there is no backup anywhere indicates brazen negligence on the part of everyone responsible for the data. Everyone who had a part in designing the system and managing the system is culpable. The most ridiculous part of this is the over-reliance on server-side data storage by the sidekick designers.
And I forgot to mention that Unity doesn't provide access to native library calls. So, for instance, there's no way to bring up the iPhone keyboard from within a Unity app. This could very well be changing -- and may have already changed, but last I knew Unity apps on iPhone were severely crippled by this.
But that's just a symptom of the real problem with using Unity as the basis for development -- you're relying on a closed platform from third-party with relatively low vested interest in the platform. If a platform doesn't make fiscal sense for Unity to continue publishing and updating, as a Unity developer you have very little recourse. I'm not pretending that it's any different for Apple and NS libs, but Apple has much more invested in the success of the platform, so it's much more unlikely that they will discontinue support of the platform.
Unity is nice, but the end result is massive bloat. It's a nice way for a developer or company to get into the iPhone market without having to learn Objective C, but I don't think they've 'nailed it.'
I've seen extremely simple applications take 18 - 24 MB space on an iPhone. That's with no textures, no graphics no nothing except basic 3D objects being rendered. An equivalent app developed in Objective C takes 10% - 25% of that.
18 - 24MB doesn't seem like a lot until you think about the fact that all that is all being loaded into the very limited available memory. There's very little room to make something that takes advantage of Unity's framework. And the fact that Unity is trying to do garbage collection in a separate thread means that the performance of the App goes down.
You're right, they're doing some cool stuff -- and the fact that it's cross-platform capable makes it that much better. But personally, I decided to put in the little bit of time it took to learn Objective C and the discipline to retain and release over putting my eggs into Unity's basket (that one was an easy choice).
Perl was so. fricking. awesome. back when the only choices were shell scripts or compiled apps. It was such a leap forward. Who wouldn't be excited about Perl back in the '90s
But we're far beyond the sophistication of Perl. I'm not saying that you can't do some pretty fricking awesome things in Perl, but that Perl doesn't do many of the meta-tasks that we've come to expect in languages. These supporting features don't necessarily make things run or run fast, but rather help developers in the process of creation and maintenance. The industry has grown up and the black magic of hacking has been codified into the craft of coding.
And Perl isn't alone here, C++ is undergoing the same process.
'Ship early and ship often.'
But it's definitely no silver bullet; it's not for every project, nor every developer, I've been disappointed to see how integration of Agile via scrum derail projects and upended a department where inexperienced / low skilled developers got overwhelmed by the shift in focus from doing it 'perfectly' to shipping. There's a subtle but significant shift in responsibility from the project manager to the developer. Lots of guys don't like it and really can't handle having things so visible; they're used to being able to hide behind the complexity of their work for days or even weeks without really having any accountability. Agile gives them nothing to hide behind.
Moving the factory to another location may work; the labor force is (relatively) easy to replace, but I highly doubt that MS could pull it off.
There's a reason that places like San Francisco and Seattle are home to Google and Microsoft. The kind of people who make Google and Microsoft work are attracted to the quality of life offered by the location. Making money is enough for some people, but for many others, what you do for money is just part of the equation.
Maybe Microsoft will try to pull a Boeing and move corporate headquarters to Reno Nevada, but I doubt they could pull off uprooting their labor force and moving them elsewhere.
don't know what's more funny, this comment, or the fact that it was moderated "Insightful."
It's truly surprising how self-destructive these people are... do they really expect that they will gain support for actions like this? Their movement, and their cause will only suffer for stupidity like this.
I know I wasn't very clear about it, but my thinking goes something like this:
1) A political party can use socialistic economic theory in crafting platforms and laws no matter whether they choose to name themselves "Socialist" or not.
2) A political party can name themselves "Socialist" and not represent or embody any of the economic theories of Socialism in praxis.
Therefore political entities are distinct and separate from the economic theory.
Even so, you're right; within the context of this argument I've not given enough focus to the political "Socialist" party and focused exclusively on the economic theory. Even after you made valid assertions and backed up your assertions with evidence, I still didn't give your points the credence they deserved.
In addition, I've acted rudely in how I responded to you.
I apologize. I should have been focusing less on why I disagree, and more on what the fundamental discussion was.
I've become very angry about the level of noise, flippant demonization and overall 'hate' that's been associated with something so good as providing healthcare to everyone that I became overly emotional about this argument. Instead of being a honest broker in a dialog, I shamefully became just another one of the shouting voices.
I believe that there is a fundamental problem with how some people are framing this debate; the use of Hitler and Naziism as scare tactics is vile and low. My fear is that naive and dangerous people are being manipulated by the constantly blowing bellows of hate; thus my example of some conservative comparing their lot to that of a Jew in Nazi Germany. The message is out: Obama is like Hitler, and America is under attack by un-American forces of Socialism. No matter how ridiculous it may seem to me, there are plenty of people who are swallowing this whole.
It's difficult; often I feel like I'm trying to tell people that the world is round while they insist it's flat.
I completely agree; politics is not a team sport and it's a shame that some put party first and have a 'can-do-no-wrong' attitude about their 'team.' It's interesting that you feel I am a part of the team-sport mentality. I've always thought myself independent from that; but maybe it's time for a little introspection.
I'd say that putting a 'right' label on the source of the hyperbole is falling into this dichotomy of good-guys and bad-guys; however, it's difficult not to -- since there is no finer granularity available than 'right,' 'far-right,' and the individuals from whom these absurd ideas are espoused -- and there are many.
The thing that saddens me most about all of this team-sport mentality is that people seem to be forgetting that we are all countrymen. We are all in this together. Whether or not we agree on the semantics of the policies, we all have the ultimate goal of prosperity for our children and our countrymen.
A political party with the word Socialist in their name does not equate to Socialism.
Cripe man, do you really think the Republican party mean republic? Does the Democratic party mean democracy? Or maybe you think that North Korea is a Democracy because the official name of the country is "Democratic People's Republic of Korea."
Are you saying that by calling Bush's actions Hitler-like, someone is implicitly saying that they are the equivalent of a Jew in Nazi Germany? If so, that's beyond ignorant; I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. Maybe you don't understand the difference between people who dissent and people who are exterminated, but it seems pretty clear to me.
And I've already said:
Maybe you don't understand, so I'll say it again:
If I heard anyone in America liken themselves to Jews in Nazi Germany I would be just as outraged.
I'm sorry, friend, but this is absolutely not what I've been saying. If you go back to where this all began, this is what I wrote:
I'm sorry? You mean the Hitler who wrote this long before he was elected:
or this
or this:
Hitler was always a repugnant little man thrust into a position he should never have held because of reparations for World War I.
It would be very interesting to hear if you could find an analog to these quotes in any of Obama's books or writings.
Sorry, I just don't care whether you want to justify your actions by the actions of others whom you don't agree with. That's your choice. You want to run on this intellectual hamster-wheel of calling people Hitler -- maybe that's where your mind is. Maybe when anyone brings up anything having to do with Naziism in the current social debate, that's your go-to talking point.
That's fine. But it sure is boring and it isn't relevant.
The further we get down this path, the more evident it is that your only goal to justify the ridiculous use of Naziism and Hitler by the right to demonize Obama. Okay, that's where your head is at, but honestly, I. Just. Don't. Care.
Go ahead, call Obama Hitler. Honestly, it's so ridiculous, it's just funny.
The fact that you still still can't see the difference between conservatives in America likening themselves to Jews in Nazi Germany and using the idea of Hitler to demonize someone else... well, all I can say is that I'm sorry for you.
Thanks mr. colloquial dictionary. I guess I should start writing "loose" whenever I mean "lose." Because that's what the term means nowadays.
Sorry friend, trying to redefine Socialism because a group of people you hang around with can't understand the difference between systems of government and economic systems doesn't change what the term means. It just means that they, and you, don't understand what it means.
And so my friend, although it's probably going to be fun to have some ad nauseum argument about whether the a group of people misusing a term means that it gets redefined, I have one or two more intellectually stimulating things I'd rather do with my time -- like pull the hair from my nostrils.
Thus and heretofore, mr. colloquial dictionary (right-wing edition), Socialism means... well whatever you think it means -- I guess. And while we're at it, we should redefine Liberalism to mean godless, poo-poo headism that makes people cry... and bad things too. And maybe we should also redefine Conservative to mean flowers and love and all good things.
Good idea. I like you thinking!
I guess we're back to ye olde (and boring/unproductive) Hitler name calling. The only one bringing up Hitler in the context of this conversation was you. You've been trying desperately, it seems, to find some parity between what I'm saying and a bunch of people using an stupid rhetorical trick to demonize someone else.
So some people called George Bush Hitler. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but it doesn't really matter in the context of what I wrote. I played nice and answered your question even though it was -- at best -- tangential to the conversation (but more likely -- as seems to be supprted by your latest post -- a clumsy attempt to open an ad hominem attack against me).
The sad part of it all is what is implied by your equating these stupid, hackneyed rhetorical tricks to the absolutely outrageous, callous hyperbole that I wrote about.
It's like you just don't seem to get it. It's as if you can't understand the absolute horror that was perpetrated against those people. It's as if you can't see how awful it is that the memory of those poor souls is being denigrated by sad, angry people who can't possibly fathom the travesty of it; otherwise they wouldn't dare equate the 'travails' of being a conservative in America under a black president to being a Jew in Nazi Germany.
That's interesting. So now you've heard people say that they felt like Jews in Nazi Germany while George Bush was president.
And not only did you hear it before, you heard it for years.
That's interesting. I never heard anything like that before. Such extreme hyperbole is so outrageous, invective, ignorant and so unbelievably callous, I know I'd remember it. I'd be just as outraged to hear anyone hear it -- no matter who they were.
So in a way, you get your answer about me -- although I'm not quite certain why you chose to focus on me personally rather than what I said.
So essentially you've tried to make the disingenuous argument, "Them thar govmint guys is takin' over them thar internets. Socialism!"
Sorry, friend; you can call it Fascism if you want. You can call it Communism, Totalitarianism or whatever diabolical system of government you want to try to demonize it with, but Socialism just doesn't work. It's like comparing country music to Fox News; they're just not the same thing. They may rely on each other, they may have many of the same supporters, but they're not the same thing.
I don't know if you're being willfully ignorant to support your position, or you just can't understand that Socialism does not equate to Communism or any other form of government.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that it's a complex concept confused by decades of propaganda and demonization of Communist states and by association, Socialism. But believe it or not France -- that dastardly Socialist country -- is a Democracy.
It's not about the tired old demonization via Nazi comparisons; it's about trying to put yourself in the place of the persecuted although you are not. It's about trying to synthesize something 'wrong' with America; but other than speaking in platitudes and generalizations about some unknown threat, you can't say what it is.
Conversations become trite and meaningless when the old Nazi accusations start flying. What I'm appalled by, and what I wrote about, is the idea that conservatives would think that the awful 'plight' of conservatives in America is somehow akin to what happened to the Jews. I mean, what kind of gall does that take?
And if you still think this is about name calling, and demonizing Bush or Obama by calling them Hitler, it's not really necessary to reply; I'm not really interested.
Wow, way to get back on talking points! Awesome job pulling that sentence completely out of context and trying to make this some debate about how the country will implode because everyone might have access to healthcare. AAAH! IT'S CRAZY! 'MERIKA IS GOING TO END BECAUSE EVERYONE MIGHT HAVE ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE HEALTH INSURANCE!!!!!!11
So let's usher in some context here and see whether this is really a stealth debate about health insurance. What did that "Enter socialism" guy say? Oh yeah:
So mr. colloquial dictionary, what does that have to do with Socialism? I'm interested in how the government taking control of a public medium (much like they would the highways, the telephones and the television) in an emergency has to do with "state control of an industry."
I suppose you could try the not so sleight-of-hand argument and say "them govmint guys want to control this here internet industry." Well, that's not only disingenuous, it completely ignores the definition of Socialism. Socialism is not a political system; it is an economic system.
So you're implying that someone is somehow justified for equating their own position in the current American political landscape to Jews in Nazi Germany because someone somewhere called someone else Hitler.
Nice.
I guess maybe it's a pretty abstract thing thing if you've never seen the death camps. It's difficult for me that people do not understand the fucking horror those people went through? It makes me angry that some feel they can use them for their own political purposes -- purposes that have not one thing to do with Nazis or Jews.
What does this have to do with Socialism? Really? The ignorant hyperbole coming from the right wing is unbelievable. I mean, do any of you even know what Socialism is? Or do you just know that it was a term co opted by the ignorant, vile fools who called themselves the National Socialist (NAZI) Party?
I actually read someone who equated the position of conservatives in America right now to the Jews in Germany while the Nazis came to power. It's un-fucking-believable really. I've been to Auschwitz and seen the sea of empty shoes that belonged to men and women -- to boys and girls who were extinguished. I've seen the well-documented horror of mechanized human extermination. Equating the conservative position within the current political landscape as an analog to the horror of what the Nazis did is not just ignorant, insidious, hateful hyperbole, it degrades the absolute horror of what was done and those it was done to.